Thanks Berry. I will do my best to participate in the call but in case I am unable to do so or can only attend a portion of it, I want to communicate my support as described in the agenda below. Note that I am participating as an individual and do not represent any group.
Chuck
From: Gnso-igo-ingo <gnso-igo-ingo-bounces@icann.org> On Behalf Of mail@berrycobb.com
Sent: Wednesday, June 6, 2018 8:53 AM
To: gnso-igo-ingo@icann.org
Subject: [Gnso-igo-ingo] Agenda - Reconvened IGO-INGO Protections PDP Working Group (Red Cross) - 07 May 2018 @ 14:00 UTC
Importance: High
Hi All,
Below is the proposed agenda for our next meeting scheduled 7 May 2018 at 14:00 UTC. This meeting is scheduled for 120 minutes.
Agenda:
(1) Review of Definitive List of National Society Names and variant principles (attached)
- Principles & Scope of Protection for Red Cross Names - 6 June 2018.docx[Chuck Gomes] I support the following: a) the edits made to Additional Criteria; b) the proposed Error Correction bullet; c) the proposed Deletions bullet. I am a little confused about the section titled Remaining Issues for Discussion; I don’t have strong feelings one way or the other on the specific requests; I have no objections to any changes in support of 1, 2 & 3; it appears to me that no action is needed for 4 but if one is agreed to, I am sure I could support it; I have no problem including the different grammatical forms in 5; the only way I would support the items in 6 is if we changed the rules to accommodate them and I would advise against that unless a strong case can be made to do so for any of them.
- National Society names list_v0.4.xlsx[Chuck Gomes] I support this list.
(2) Review of WG Preliminary Recommendations & start of consensus call (attached)
- Proposed Draft Text of Reconvened WG Recommendations - 5 June 2018.docx[Chuck Gomes] I support the recommendations as edited.
- note this is a substantial revision from the prior version sent a few weeks ago. The structure is the same, but text revisions to better reflect scope of discussions and prior events
(3) Review proposed timeline and members list (attached)
- Proposed Reconvened WG Timeline.docx[Chuck Gomes] The revised timeline seems reasonable to me. As we all know, timelines are hard to fix in advance, so it probably should be a best estimate timeline.
(4) AoB and next meeting
Thank you.
B
Berry A. Cobb
GNSO Policy Consultant
720.839.5735
@berrycobb